The judgment of the court below is reversed.

Defendant shall be punished by a fine of KRW 4,000,000.

The above fine shall not be paid by the defendant.

1. The summary of the grounds for appeal explicitly withdrawn the misapprehension of legal principles on the first trial date.

A. The Defendant, as stated in the judgment below, did not commit an indecent act by cutting the victim’s negative part by drinking as stated in the judgment below.

B. Sentencing, even if the Defendant was found guilty, the lower court’s punishment (the amount of 4 million won, the completion of sexual assault treatment programs for 40 hours) is too unreasonable.

2. We examine ex officio the reasons for ex officio appeal prior to the judgment.

Article 56(1) and (2) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse (amended by Act No. 15352, Jan. 16, 2018; Article 56(1) and (2) of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse, which uniformly provides for the restriction on employment of children and juveniles-related institutions, etc. for a period of ten years for each defendant of a case, taking into account the seriousness of the crime, the risk of recidivism, etc., while sentencing punishment for an individual sex offense case by the court, and Article 3 of the Addenda to the above Act provides that the amended provisions of Article 56 of the Act on the Protection of Children and Juveniles against Sexual Abuse shall also apply to persons who committed a sex offense before July 17, 2018, which is the date the above Act enters into force, and who have not been finally binding.

In this respect, the judgment of the court below is no longer maintained.

However, notwithstanding the above reasons for reversal ex officio, the defendant's assertion of misunderstanding the facts against the judgment of the court below is still subject to the judgment of the court, and the following is examined.

3. In a case where the statements of the witness, including the victim of the judgment on the assertion of mistake of facts, are mutually consistent and consistent with the facts charged, they shall not be rejected without permission, unless there is any separate evidence to deem that there is no credibility from an objective perspective. The witness’s statement is the same.